Is the XboxSeriesX really more powerful than the Ps5 (Amd SmartShift technology)?
I'm not a fanboy, I just want to find out more.
Mark Cerny made this example here.
36 cu's at 1 GHz are 4.6 teraflops and the value is also achieved with 48 cu's at 0.75 GHz.
36 cu's: 1ghz is 33.33% greater than 0.75ghz.
48 cu's: 0.75ghz is 33.33% less than 1ghz
The Ps5 has 2.23ghz at 36 cu's and the XboxSeriesX has 1.825ghz at 52 cu's.
Ps5 36 cu's: 2.23ghz is 22.19% bigger than 1.825ghz.
XboxSeriesX 36 cu's: 1.825ghz is 22.19% less than 2.23%.
The frequency is more important than the compute units and the Ps5 has a clear advantage with 22.19%.
Mark Cerny said in the speech on Ps5 that at 33.33% (now with the example between 1 and 0.75ghz) many things like the rasterization, the processing of the command buffer and more are accelerated by the percentage.
The disadvantage of relying more on the frequency is of course the heat, but Sony got along well with the housing of the Ps5.
In contrast to the XboxSeriesX, the Ps5 uses a CPU with a variable clock frequency (means that the 3.5Ghz of the CPU is only used when it is really needed. The Xbox series x runs constantly, fixed at 3.8ghz.
With this variable clock frequency, the Ps5 can use Smartshift technology to squeeze out every last pixel - says Mark Cerny.
What do you say about it?
Probably the difference is only minimal as with the last 2 generations, there's really no point in jerking off about specs in my opinion…
Here the performance is increased by 10%, so that will definitely make a difference.
Well, aren't they always built for the weaker console?
The lead only brings something for the couple of 1st party games.
So I watch videos like that and see hardly any difference between the two consoles. In 2013 there was also an argument about specs, but as you can see for no reason. Most of the time the horsepower is a little stronger, but in my opinion the difference is not worth mentioning.
The last paragraph doesn't make sense. Because the PS5 can tackle down, it can't tickle the last bit out. That is to save electricity.
In general, it is mediocre to evaluate a platform based on a few numbers. And using a PR man from one company as a source of discussion doesn't really help either. Hardware is really very complicated.
And then it also depends on the software. And the task. What good is 52 CUs if the task can only be parallelized to 30. Then the higher cycle brings more. Etc. Etc ^^
You seem like someone who knows all about it.
Please explain the history of teraflops to me
So 2.23ghz is the maximum value and can only be clocked down. My mistake.
So while the XboxSeriesX uses more compute units at a lower frequency, the Ps5 has fewer compute units at a higher clock rate, but relies on Smartshift.
What exactly?
So I didn't bother with the consoles. I always stay away from the hype before a release. That doesn't help and only costs nerves ^^
But as you describe it, one GPU clocks more slowly, but can increase briefly (boost) while the other is constant.
Constancy is nice to plan and easier to program. Because you can't stay too long with the other, etc.
In any case, the flops are not directly comparable because of all that.
Ahh, I would have waited ^^
So how around you see it doesn't matter in the end. Whether you downclock from the Max or up. But that's not what I meant either. Vill brings a lot to the Boos. But the fact that it can be done gradually doesn't tickle ^^ (So in theory it would be possible. If you stomp down to the "consumption" to save heat for later. But well. Let's get back to that in a game is done like this. And how the bottom line is, who knows. In case of doubt, the easiest way will be chosen ^^)
Ah. Good to have summarized that again.
In the operating room it's quite a mess for me…
What Smartshift will really bring remains to be seen. In theory, as a layperson, I guess you can't really say what that actually makes up in the end.
The differences were much bigger with the current generation and you didn't see any differences, so I doubt it will be any different this time. The consoles are way too close to each other in terms of specs.
As DeiDei2303 has already explained, pure TF doesn't mean much, especially not for consoles, where the whole architecture is important. (Just 15% difference. The XOX had 40% more than the PS4 Pro.)
Except for the TF and the texture fill rate, the PS5 is actually better in all areas, but it would never occur to me to say that it is stronger.
I stick to the fact that this generation will not see any differences. Not with third-party titles anyway, as no developer tailors their titles to both systems.
I only see an advantage for Sony with the built-in SSD, which is about twice as fast. This not only enables faster loading times. Developers report that they can use it to stream / load a lot more information at once and thus also provide relief elsewhere.
Now comes Oodle Kraken / Oodle Textures, a new compression method, which should almost double the performance again.
http://www.radgametools.com/oodlekraken.htm
https://www.notebookcheck.net/...015.0.html
I'll get both consoles anyway, but expect that the differences, if any, will be minimal.
FLOP, floating point operation per second (floating point calculation per second). In earlier computers, where the processor did not yet have a floating point unit, these were calculated by the normal core. By specifying the FLOPS you could then see the performance. And the big difference to the clock frequency is that not only the pure processor speed but also the bus and compiler speed are taken into account.
"Complete Sony Bullsh! T"
The XBOX SERIES X is faster than the Playstation 5 despite a low clock rate, as it has 16 more compute units.
2.
The disadvantage of relying more on the frequency is of course the heat, but Sony got along well with the housing of the Ps5.
They should have got along well with it?
The case is the Playstation's biggest problem! It won't chill well enough!
https://www.pcgameshardware.de/Playstation-5-Konsolen-265878/News/Angebliche-Ueberhitzungsprobleme-kritisch-zu-sehen-1347223/
3.
In contrast to the XboxSeriesX, the Ps5 uses a CPU with a variable clock frequency (means that the 3.5Ghz of the CPU is only used when it is really needed. The Xbox series x runs constantly, fixed at 3.8ghz.
where is the disadvantage with the XSX?
The XSX can use a fixed clock rate because it is cooled well enough compared to the Playstation 5! A variable clock rate is more of a disadvantage!
Because I don't think anyone wants the quality to suddenly suffer in an AufwENIDGEN scene because the graphics engine, for example, slows down.
😄i just say The true
I'm speechless
Exactly the same as Biden vs Trump, I'm sinking to your level.
The difference between the Ps4 Pro and the xox was 42.9% while between the Ps5 and the Xsx it was just 15%.
1.) There are many advantages to using a higher clock rate, you can see these advantages on the Internet. To prevent this from relying on more compute units.
2.) Due to the variable clock frequency in the CPU, Sony can use the Smartshift technology, as the unused power while you are playing the GPu is amplified at 2.23GHz. The teraflop is unimportant.
3.) This strategy (smart shift) can prevent bottlenecks.
Bottlenecks: "If, for example, the processor slows down the performance of the graphics card and it can't develop its full potential."
4.) Now comes Oodle Kraken / Oodle Textures, a new compression method, which should almost double the performance again. http://www.radgametools.com/oodlekraken.htm https://www.notebookcheck.net/...015.0.html
You can find all these facts on the internet
A higher clock rate will only mean that your graphics unit will be hotter than usual.
Teraflops shouldn't be important? You already know what teraflops are my boy right?
Bottleneck at a console. It's getting more and more ridiculous
Microsoft has some great tricks too:
(2:50)
Today is a good day
